Owens v. TransUnion, LLC

Full title: SEAN OWENS, v. TRANSUNION, LLC, et al.

Court: United States District Court, E.D. Texas, Sherman Division

Date published: Feb 12, 2024

Civil Action 4:20-cv-665-SDJ-KPJ (E.D. Tex. Feb. 12, 2024)

Opinion

Civil Action 4:20-cv-665-SDJ-KPJ

02-12-2024

SEAN OWENS, v. TRANSUNION, LLC, et al.

SEAN D. JORDAN, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.

MEMORANDUM ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

SEAN D. JORDAN, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.

Came on for consideration the report of the United States Magistrate Judge in this action, this matter having been heretofore referred to the Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636. On September 9, 2022, the report of the Magistrate Judge (the “Report”), (Dkt. #193), was entered containing proposed findings of fact and recommendations that Defendant Navient Solutions, LLC's (“Navient”) Motion to Dismiss the Fourth Amended Complaint or Strike Impermissible Claims (“Navient's Motion”), (Dkt. #123); and Defendant Educational Credit Management Corporation's (“ECMC”) Motion to Dismiss the Fourth Amended Complaint or in the Alternative, Motion to Strike (“ECMC's Motion”), (Dkt. #126), be GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. On September 20, 2022, Plaintiff Sean Owens (“Plaintiff”) filed Objections, (Dkt. #195), to the Report.

The Court has conducted a de novo review of the Objections and is of the opinion that the findings and conclusions of the Magistrate Judge are correct, and the Objection is without merit as to the ultimate findings of the Magistrate Judge. Accordingly, Plaintiff's Objections, (Dkt. #195), are OVERRULED and the Magistrate Judge's report is ADOPTED as the findings and conclusions of the Court.

IT IS ORDERED that:

1. Navient's Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's Fourth Amended Complaint or Strike Impermissible Claims, (Dkt. #123), is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART as follows:

a. Navient's Motion is GRANTED as to Plaintiff's defamation/libel claim, TCPA claim, and “intrusion on seclusion” invasion of privacy claim. These claims are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.

b. Navient's Motion is DENIED as to Plaintiff's FDCPA Claim and Section 1681s-2(b) FCRA claim.

2. ECMC's Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's Fourth Amended Complaint or in the Alternative, Motion to Strike, (Dkt. #126), is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART as follows:

a. ECMC's Motion is GRANTED with respect to Plaintiff's defamation/libel claim as to ECMC and the claim is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.

b. ECMC's Motion is DENIED as to all remaining arguments raised in ECMC's Motion.

So ORDERED and SIGNED.